Timkins ,it's called education or awareness,contraception and personal responsibility.Abortions in late pregnancy should never occur,because there are so many seeking adoption.We have a very self indulgent and hedonestic society and these are the consequences.

Bozzie – I am sure late term abortions are performed for a variety of reasons – because someone may abuse the process (as every process is abused) does not warrant banning it for those who have a legitimate reason and the incidence of late term as so few you need to look on a case by case basis which you and I cannot do – (do you want to ban all centrelink payments because someone rips is off ?)


Jaxxen – reality is “abortion in the first trimester on demand” IS THE LAW – I support it and I am “in denial” of nothing.


The fact is –
People in control (individual choice and individual responsibility) of their own destiny ultimately develop into more complete individuals for the greater benefit of society overall,
If individuals are repressed by rigid social or legal conventions (no choice and, thus, no individual responsibility), it works to the detriment of the individual and thus weakens society over all.

Please advise what authority you have to make decisions of people you have never met and whose circumstances you do not know. That you just dislike the idea or abortion is not a reason and neither is any “religious values” you may hold (because they are not universally supported)..


Arjay – your observation on population is chilling – but is not a justification for abortion. I agree with you, it is the most critical problem the humanity faces and of such magnitude that “abortion” does not really warrant a mention.


Amanda - I fully support your view - your body - your choice.
If we cannot exercise choice – life is reduced to mere existence and individuals to status of chattels or vassals.

Col
At last a real debate. What is freedom? What is it to be free? What are the threats to freedom? What has been the underlying foundations to the moral systems, the legal systems and their governance that have underpinned the development of our western liberal democracies? Has there really been a dark age between the ancient Greeks with their ideas and the enlightened thoughts of the 17/18/19/20/21st century thinkers?

If you can answer these without a single reference to the teachings of Jesus Christ, from which a human community like none other before or since has formed, then you are certainly of the Enlightenment's blind and disillusioned wandering the desert.

Col, you emphasise the individual and neglect the reality of the "group" As humans we are social beings. To be so, and as a consequence of being so, we develop customs, mores and rules. Your notion of society comprising self-autonomous individuals whose choice is exercised at the level of what they do according to their feeling in the situation, rather than how they act in accordance with a freely chosen and understood moral code, provides for a confused, unreflective society. A society where emotion rather than reason becomes the currency of thought and consequential response. Where are we today? Is this not the grist for the media's mill?

Human groups are best served by comprising freedom loving individuals infused with meaning, purpose and programme that is always underpinned by an abiding love in service to others. Now that is counter cultural. This freedom flows from the choice of living the teachings ( not rules) of Jesus Christ. As such it is a state of relationship that is open to all; whether in a paddy field, a foundry, an Emergency hospital ward, the Corporate Boardroom. I know this can be countered with stories of historical horror and contemporary red neck fundamentalists, and silly creationists. Alas, the human story. Yet this does not diminish the fundamental story of our western civilisation's formation that has been at the sharpest point of the leading arrow of the evolution process - the human. Wow!

Arjay,
I would agree that there needs to be better programs and methods developed to limit unwanted pregnancy, and so reduce the need for so much abortion. If there are programs and methods already in place, then they are obviously not very effective.

There can be better sex education programs and better forms of contraception, but personally I would have more faith in contraception rather than education, as education can become indoctrination if it is carried out by the wrong people.

For females:- contraceptive implants seem to be more effective than the oral contraception pill. For males:- there are some potential new forms of contraception that could be further developed with enough government support and backing (eg Risug at http://www.malecontraceptives.org/methods/risug_frame.html )

However for decades pro-choice groups and feminists have halted nearly all inquiry into abortion, and by so doing, they have halted or stalled research also, and much necessary information is now not available.

The author has not provided one fact regards abortion, nor has she given any suggestions or ideas on how to limit unwanted pregnancy in the first place, and that is highly typical of almost all pro-choice groups and of feminists. Big on mantra and indoctrination (eg. proclaiming that women have a right to have an abortion), but small on providing practical solutions to problems (eg, finding effective ways of stopping unwanted pregnancy in the first place).

There is also the emotional scaring that can often occur with women who have had an abortion. This can last a lifetime, but minimal research has been undertaken into this also.

Any further delays in carrying out proper research, and then developing improved ways to limit unwanted pregnancies in the first place, will only mean more unwanted pregnancies, and then more abortions, and each week nearly 2,000 abortions take place in Australia already (most of which are paid for by the taxpayer).

The author’s gender-biased ethics, (in leaving fathers out of the article and regarding them as irrelevant), is also another issue, as I believe she won’t solve too many social problems by that

MJB
Re” . What is freedom?”

“Freedom is Responsibility -
It is the right of the individual to exercise choice in every aspect of their life and to live with the consequences of those choices” – Col Rouge


Re - “….without a single reference to the teachings of Jesus Christ…”

It is impertinent of you to presume your “interpretation / version” of the teachings of Jesus Christ is the same as mine. You have no knowledge to my Christian beliefs and I have no interest in yours.

We live in a secular world, your religious views have no authority over people not of your particular denomination or sect and nor should they. Ordinary people fought long and hard to remove the jackboot of the inquisition and the threat of burning as a heretic from the multiple affronts on humanity as used by the “clergy” of old to enforce their absolute will on society.


Re “Col, you emphasise the individual and neglect the reality of the "group" …..”

British Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher once declared. "There's no such thing as society. There are individual men and women and there are families."

I had the privilege of voting for Margaret Thatcher and agree with her.

I refer you to my already posted views – in essence, any and every society is only as strong as the individuals who comprise it.

We are sovereigns of our own bodies. We are not the chattels of society, church or state.


As for the rest –

When you are prepared to show me the “authority” or “credentials” you have to impose your choice / will on people you do not know, then I will be happy to listen. However, if you try to invoke the name of God or Jesus Christ I will simply do the same and we will be at stalemate.

Finally –

Life without Choice is mere Existence – "Choice" is too important.

I can never and will never take the path of appeasement and thus cannot accept “existence” as the compromise alternative to “Life”.

Col,
There can be “choice” for some in society, but when it comes to abortion, “choice” is a farce.

There are nearly 2,000 taxpayer funded abortions occurring each week in Australia, but the taxpayer has minimal say in any of this. Even if a member of the taxpayer public wants information from government about abortion, they will likely receive very few answers.

Even senators can't get much information about abortion. For example, Senator Harradine has asked for more information about abortion, but received very little. See…http://www.acl.org.au/home/browse.stw?article_id=2037 . Either government is holding back on that information, or government does not know the information itself.

While enormous amounts of taxpayer’s money has been spent on abortion, there has been minimal research actually carried out into abortion, and comparatively very little money spent on identifying more reliable methods of contraception, (which have not been very reliable at all. see… http://www.abc.net.au/science/news/health/HealthRepublish_843232.htm )

Eventually, because so much about abortion has been ignored or suppressed, and because so little has been done over the years to reduce the chances of unwanted pregnancy occurring in the first place, the rates of abortion have hardly decreased.

In reality, abortion is the only choice for many. There is no other choice, and about the only people who would really gain from the present rates of abortion, would be the operators of abortion clinics, and maybe some professional feminists.

The author made no mention of any of the above in her article, and choose to talk about violinists instead. Should there be any trust in such authors?